Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 54
Filtrar
1.
Am Heart J ; 171(1): 64-72.e1-2, 2016 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26699602

RESUMO

The MDEpiNet is a public-private partnership between the US Food and Drug Administration's Center for Devices and Radiological Health and participating partners. The PASSION program is an MDEpiNet-sponsored program that aims to demonstrate the goals of MDEpiNet by using cardiovascular medical device registries to bridge evidence gaps across the medical device total product life cycle. To this end, a PASSION Think Tank meeting took place in October 2014 in Silver Spring, MD, to facilitate discussion between stakeholders about the successes, challenges, and future novel applications of medical device registries, with particular emphasis on identifying pilot projects. Participants spanned a broad range of groups including patients, device manufacturers, regulators, physicians/academicians, professional societies, providers, and payers. The meeting focus included 4 areas of cardiovascular medicine intended to cultivate interest in 4 MDEpiNet disease-specific/device-specific working groups: coronary intervention, electrophysiology, valvular disease, and peripheral vascular disease. In addition, more general issues applying to registry-based infrastructure and analytical methodologies for assessing device benefit/risk were considered to provide context for the working groups as PASSION programs going forward. This article summarizes the discussions at the meeting and the future directions of the PASSION program.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/terapia , Sistema de Registros , Medição de Risco/métodos , Gestão da Segurança/métodos , Congressos como Assunto , Humanos , Relações Interprofissionais , Estados Unidos
2.
Am Heart J ; 169(6): 847-53, 2015 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26027623

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Million Hearts is a national initiative to prevent 1 million heart attacks and strokes over 5 years by improving cardiovascular prevention. An important tool in the success of programs like Million Hearts is public ranking on the quality of practices, yet different measures may provide different rankings, so the true quality of practices is difficult to discern. We evaluated the quality of ambulatory cardiology care using performance measure metrics. METHODS: We compared rankings of practices participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry using measures from (1) the physician quality reporting system and (2) the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement. We compared achievement rates for measures between the 2 frameworks and determined correlations in rankings using Spearman correlation coefficients. RESULTS: From January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2012, there were 1,711,326 patients enrolled from 111 US practices. Among eligible patients, the physician quality reporting system and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement measures were achieved in 76.1% versus 77.4% for antiplatelet prescription (P < .001), 68.3% versus 90.8% for blood pressure control (P < .001), 26.9% versus 43.4% for cholesterol control (P < .001), and 37.4% versus 40.6% for smoking cessation (P = .383). Practice rankings were strongly correlated for antiplatelet prescription (correlation coefficient 0.98) and cholesterol control (0.92) but poorly correlated for blood pressure control (0.39) and smoking cessation (0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of preventive care and individual practice rankings vary significantly depending on how measures are defined. Publicly reported measures need to be validly associated with outcomes to avoid incorrectly evaluating practice performance and failing to achieve public health goals.


Assuntos
Cardiologia/normas , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde/normas , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Idoso , Assistência Ambulatorial/normas , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Sistema de Registros , Estados Unidos
3.
Circulation ; 127(17): 1793-800, 2013 Apr 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23470859

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Studies conducted decades ago described substantial disagreement and errors in physicians' angiographic interpretation of coronary stenosis severity. Despite the potential implications of such findings, no large-scale efforts to measure or improve clinical interpretation were subsequently undertaken. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared clinical interpretation of stenosis severity in coronary lesions with an independent assessment using quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in 175 randomly selected patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention at 7 US hospitals in 2011. To assess agreement, we calculated mean difference in percent diameter stenosis between clinical interpretation and QCA and a Cohen weighted κ statistic. Of 216 treated lesions, median percent diameter stenosis was 80.0% (quartiles 1 and 3, 80.0% and 90.0%), with 213 (98.6%) assessed as ≥70%. Mean difference in percent diameter stenosis between clinical interpretation and QCA was 8.2±8.4%, reflecting an average higher percent diameter stenosis by clinical interpretation (P<0.001). A weighted κ of 0.27 (95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.36) was found between the 2 measurements. Of 213 lesions considered ≥70% by clinical interpretation, 56 (26.3%) were <70% by QCA, although none were <50%. Differences between the 2 measurements were largest for intermediate lesions by QCA (50% to <70%), with variation existing across sites. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians tended to assess coronary lesions treated with percutaneous coronary intervention as more severe than measurements by QCA. Almost all treated lesions were ≥70% by clinical interpretation, whereas approximately one quarter were <70% by QCA. These findings suggest opportunities to improve clinical interpretation of coronary angiography.


Assuntos
Angiografia Coronária/normas , Estenose Coronária/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose Coronária/cirurgia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/normas , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
4.
Am Heart J ; 168(4): 405-413.e2, 2014 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25262248

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Although electronic product identification in the consumer sector is ubiquitous, unique identification of medical devices is just being implemented in 2014. To evaluate unique device identifiers (UDIs) in health care, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) funded the Medical Device Epidemiology Network initiative, including a demonstration of the implementation of coronary stent UDI data in the information systems of a multihospital system (Mercy Health). This report describes the first phase of the demonstration. METHODS: An expert panel of interventional cardiologists nominated by the American College of Cardiology and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions was convened with representatives of industry, health system members of the Healthcare Transformation Group, the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry, and FDA to articulate concepts needed to best use UDI-associated data. The expert panel identified 3: (1) use cases for UDI-associated data (eg, research), (2) a supplemental data set of clinically relevant attributes (eg, stent dimensions), and (3) governance and administrative principles for the authoritative management of these data. RESULTS: Eighteen use cases were identified, encompassing clinical care, supply chain management, consumer information, research, regulatory, and surveillance domains. In addition to the attributes of the FDA Global Unique Device Identification Database, 9 additional coronary stent-specific attributes were required to address use case requirements. Recommendations regarding governance were elucidated as foundational principles for UDI-associated data management. CONCLUSIONS: This process for identifying requisite extensions to support the effective use of UDI-associated data should be generalizable. Implementation of a UDI system for medical devices must anticipate both global and device-specific information.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Vigilância de Produtos Comercializados/métodos , Stents/normas , Segurança de Equipamentos , Humanos , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
5.
Med Devices (Auckl) ; 17: 97-105, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38434149

RESUMO

Objective: To demonstrate the use of the Data Extraction and Longitudinal Trend Analysis (DELTA) system in the National Evaluation System for health Technology's (NEST) medical device surveillance cloud environment by analyzing coronary stent safety using real world clinical data and comparing results to clinical trial findings. Design and Setting: Electronic health record (EHR) data from two health systems, the Social Security Death Master File, and device databases were ingested into the NEST cloud, and safety analyses of two stents were performed using DELTA. Participants and Interventions: This is an observational study of patients receiving zotarolimus drug-eluting coronary stents (ZES) or everolimus eluting coronary stents (EES) between July 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017. Results: After exclusions, 3334 patients receiving EES and 1002 receiving ZES were available for study. Analysis using inverse probability weighting showed no significant difference in one-year mortality or major adverse cardiac events (MACE) for EES compared to ZES [Mortality Odds Ratio 0.94 (95% CI 0.81-1.175); p = 0.780] [MACE Odds Ratio 1.04 (95% CI 0.92-1.16; p = 0.551]). Analysis using propensity matching showed no significant difference in EES one-year mortality (547 of 992 alive and available after censoring) compared to ZES (546 of 992) [Log-Rank statistic 0.3348 (p = 0.563)]. Conclusion: Automated cloud-based medical device safety surveillance using EHR data is feasible and was efficiently performed using DELTA. No statistically significant differences in 1-year safety outcomes between ZES and EES were identified using two statistical approaches, consistent with randomized trial findings.

7.
BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol ; 5(1): e000167, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36704544

RESUMO

Objectives: To examine the current state of unique device identifier (UDI) implementation, including barriers and facilitators, among eight health systems participating in a research network committed to real-world evidence (RWE) generation for medical devices. Design: Mixed methods, including a structured survey and semistructured interviews. Setting: Eight health systems participating in the National Evaluation System for health Technology research network within the USA. Participants: Individuals identified as being involved in or knowledgeable about UDI implementation or medical device identification from supply chain, information technology and high-volume procedural area(s) in their health system. Main outcomes measures: Interview topics were related to UDI implementation, including barriers and facilitators; UDI use; benefits of UDI adoption; and vision for UDI implementation. Data were analysed using directed content analysis, drawing on prior conceptual models of UDI implementation and the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework. A brief survey of health system characteristics and scope of UDI implementation was also conducted. Results: Thirty-five individuals completed interviews. Three of eight health systems reported having implemented UDI. Themes identified about barriers and facilitators to UDI implementation included knowledge of the UDI and its benefits among decision-makers; organisational systems, culture and networks that support technology and workflow changes; and external factors such as policy mandates and technology. A final theme focused on the availability of UDIs for RWE; lack of availability significantly hindered RWE studies on medical devices. Conclusions: UDI adoption within health systems requires knowledge of and impetus to achieve operational and clinical benefits. These are necessary to support UDI availability for medical device safety and effectiveness studies and RWE generation.

8.
JAMIA Open ; 6(1): ooac108, 2023 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36632328

RESUMO

The objective of this study is to describe application of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common data model (CDM) to support medical device real-world evaluation in a National Evaluation System for health Technology Coordinating Center (NESTcc) Test-Case involving 2 healthcare systems, Mercy Health and Mayo Clinic. CDM implementation was coordinated across 2 healthcare systems with multiple hospitals to aggregate both medical device data from supply chain databases and patient outcomes and covariates from electronic health record data. Several data quality assurance (QA) analyses were implemented on the OMOP CDM to validate the data extraction, transformation, and load (ETL) process. OMOP CDM-based data of relevant patient encounters were successfully established to support studies for FDA regulatory submissions. QA analyses verified that the data transformation was robust between data sources and OMOP CDM. Our efforts provided useful insights in real-world data integration using OMOP CDM for medical device evaluation coordinated across multiple healthcare systems.

9.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol ; 66(8): 1817-1825, 2023 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36738387

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The ThermoCool STSF catheter is used for ablation of ischemic ventricular tachycardia (VT) in routine clinical practice, although outcomes have not been studied and the catheter does not have Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for this indication. We used real-world health system data to evaluate its safety and effectiveness for this indication. METHODS: Among patients undergoing ischemic VT ablation with the ThermoCool STSF catheter pooled across two health systems (Mercy Health and Mayo Clinic), the primary safety composite outcome of death, thromboembolic events, and procedural complications within 7 days was compared to a performance goal of 15%, which is twice the expected proportion of the primary composite safety outcome based on prior studies. The exploratory effectiveness outcome of rehospitalization for VT or heart failure or repeat VT ablation at up to 1 year was averaged across health systems among patients treated with the ThermoCool STSF vs. ST catheters. RESULTS: Seventy total patients received ablation for ischemic VT using the ThermoCool STSF catheter. The primary safety composite outcome occurred in 3/70 (4.3%; 90% CI, 1.2-10.7%) patients, meeting the pre-specified performance goal, p = 0.0045. At 1 year, the effectiveness outcome risk difference (STSF-ST) at Mercy was - 0.4% (90% CI: - 25.2%, 24.3%) and at Mayo Clinic was 12.6% (90% CI: - 13.0%, 38.4%); the average risk difference across both institutions was 5.8% (90% CI: - 12.0, 23.7). CONCLUSIONS: The ThermoCool STSF catheter was safe and appeared effective for ischemic VT ablation, supporting continued use of the catheter and informing possible FDA label expansion. Health system data hold promise for real-world safety and effectiveness evaluation of cardiovascular devices.


Assuntos
Ablação por Cateter , Taquicardia Ventricular , Humanos , Resultado do Tratamento , Taquicardia Ventricular/terapia , Arritmias Cardíacas/cirurgia , Catéteres , Ablação por Cateter/efeitos adversos
10.
Circulation ; 124(13): 1483-502, 2011 Sep 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21875906

RESUMO

Consistent with the growing national focus on healthcare quality, the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have taken a leadership role over the past decade in developing measures of the quality of cardiovascular care by convening a joint ACCF/AHA Task Force on Performance Measures. The Task Force is charged with identifying the clinical topics appropriate for the development of performance measures and with assembling writing committees composed of clinical and methodological experts in collaboration with appropriate subspecialty societies. The Task Force has also created methodology documents that offer guidance in the development of process, outcome, composite, and efficiency measures. Cardiovascular performance measures using existing ACCF/AHA methodology are based on Class I or Class III guidelines recommendations, usually with Level A evidence. These performance measures, based on evidence-based ACCF/AHA guidelines, remain the most rigorous quality measures for both internal quality improvement and public reporting. However, many of the tools for diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease involve advanced technologies, such as cardiac imaging, for which there are often no underlying guideline documents. Because these technologies affect the quality of cardiovascular care and also have the potential to contribute to cardiovascular health expenditures, there is a need for more critical assessment of the use of technology, including the development of quality and performance measures in areas in which guideline recommendations are absent. The evaluation of quality in the use of cardiovascular technologies requires consideration of multiple parameters that differ from other healthcare processes. The present document describes methodology for development of 2 new classes of quality measures in these situations, appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures. Appropriate use measures are based on specific indications, processes, or parameters of care for which high level of evidence data and Class I or Class III guideline recommendations may be lacking but are addressed in ACCF appropriate use criteria documents. Structure/safety measures represent measures developed to address structural aspects of the use of healthcare technology (e.g., laboratory accreditation, personnel training, and credentialing) or quality issues related to patient safety when there are neither guidelines recommendations nor appropriate use criteria. Although the strength of evidence for appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures may not be as strong as that for formal performance measures, they are quality measures that are otherwise rigorously developed, reviewed, tested, and approved in the same manner as ACCF/AHA performance measures. The ultimate goal of the present document is to provide direction in defining and measuring the appropriate use-avoiding not only underuse but also overuse and misuse-and proper application of cardiovascular technology and to describe how such appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures might be developed for the purposes of quality improvement and public reporting. It is anticipated that this effort will help focus the national dialogue on the use of cardiovascular technology and away from the current concerns about volume and cost alone to a more holistic emphasis on value.


Assuntos
Cardiologia/normas , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Doenças Cardiovasculares/terapia , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Cardiovascular/normas , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde/métodos , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde/normas , American Heart Association , Humanos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Estados Unidos
11.
Med Devices (Auckl) ; 15: 177-186, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35761948

RESUMO

Background: The requirement for medical device manufacturers to label their devices with a unique device identifier (UDI) was formalized by the 2013 US Food and Drug Administration Unique Device Identification System Rule. However, parallel regulatory requirement for US health systems to use UDIs, particularly the electronic documentation of UDIs during patient care is lacking. Despite the lack of regulation, some health systems have implemented and are using UDIs. To assess the current state, we studied representative health system UDI implementation experiences, including barriers and the strategies to overcome them, and identified next steps to advance UDI adoption. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were performed with health system personnel involved in UDI implementation in their cardiac catheterization labs or operating rooms. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using the framework methodology of Ritchie and Spencer. An expert panel evaluated findings and informed barriers, strategies, and next steps. Results: Twenty-four interviews at ten health systems were performed. Identified barriers were internal (lack of organizational support, information technology gaps, clinical resistance) and external (information technology vendor resistance, limitations in manufacturer support, gaps in reference data, lack of an overall UDI system). Identified strategies included relationship building, education, engagement, and communication. Next steps to advance UDI adoption focus on education, research, support, and policy. Conclusions and Implications: Delineation of UDI implementation barriers and strategies provides guidance and support for health systems to adopt the UDI standard and electronically document UDIs during clinical care. Next steps illuminate critical areas for attention to advance UDI adoption and achieve a comprehensive UDI system in health care to strengthen patient care and safety.

12.
JAMIA Open ; 5(2): ooac035, 2022 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35663113

RESUMO

Objectives: To support development of a robust postmarket device evaluation system using real-world data (RWD) from electronic health records (EHRs) and other sources, employing unique device identifiers (UDIs) to link to device information. Methods: To create consistent device-related EHR RWD across 3 institutions, we established a distributed data network and created UDI-enriched research databases (UDIRs) employing a common data model comprised of 24 tables and 472 fields. To test the system, patients receiving coronary stents between 2010 and 2019 were loaded into each institution's UDIR to support distributed queries without sharing identifiable patient information. The ability of the system to execute queries was tested with 3 quality assurance checks. To demonstrate face validity of the data, a retrospective survival study of patients receiving zotarolimus or everolimus stents from 2012 to 2017 was performed using distributed analysis. Propensity score matching was used to compare risk of 6 cardiovascular outcomes within 12 months postimplantation. Results: The test queries established network functionality. In the analysis, we identified 9141 patients (Mercy = 4905, Geisinger = 4109, Intermountain = 127); mean age 65 ± 12 years, 69% males, 23% zotarolimus. Separate matched analyses at the 3 institutions showed hazard ratio estimates (zotarolimus vs everolimus) of 0.85-1.59 for subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (P = .14-.52), 1.06-2.03 for death (P = .16-.78) and 0.94-1.40 for the composite endpoint (P = .16-.62). Discussion: The analysis results are consistent with clinical studies comparing these devices. Conclusion: This project shows that multi-institutional data networks can provide clinically relevant real-world evidence via distributed analysis while maintaining data privacy.

13.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(8): e2227134, 2022 08 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35976649

RESUMO

Importance: The ThermoCool SmartTouch catheter (ablation catheter with contact force and 6-hole irrigation [CF-I6]) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and used in routine clinical practice for persistent AF ablation, although clinical outcomes for this indication are unknown. There is a need to understand whether data from routine clinical practice can be used to conduct regulatory-grade evaluations and support label expansions. Objective: To use health system data to compare the safety and effectiveness of the CF-I6 catheter for persistent AF ablation with the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter (ablation catheter with contact force and 56-hole irrigation [CF-I56]), which is approved by the FDA for this indication. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, comparative-effectiveness cohort study included patients undergoing catheter ablation for persistent AF at Mercy Health or Mayo Clinic from January 1, 2014, to April 30, 2021, with up to a 1-year follow-up using electronic health record data. Exposures: Use of the CF-I6 or CF-I56 catheter. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary safety outcome was a composite of death, thromboembolic events, and procedural complications within 7 to 90 days. The exploratory effectiveness outcome was a composite of AF-related hospitalization events after a 90-day blanking period. Propensity score weighting was used to balance baseline covariates. Risk differences were estimated between catheter groups and averaged across the 2 health care systems, testing for noninferiority of the CF-I6 vs the CF-I56 catheter with respect to the safety outcome using 2-sided 90% CIs. Results: Overall, 1450 patients (1034 [71.3%] male; 1397 [96.3%] White) underwent catheter ablation for persistent AF, including 949 at Mercy Health (186 CF-I6 and 763 CF-I56; mean [SD] age, 64.9 [9.2] years) and 501 at Mayo Clinic (337 CF-I6 and 164 CF-I56; mean [SD] age, 63.7 [9.5] years). A total of 798 (55.0%) had been treated with class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs before ablation. The safety outcome (CF-I6 - CF-I56) was similar at both Mercy Health (1.3%; 90% CI, -2.1% to 4.6%) and Mayo Clinic (-3.8%; 90% CI, -11.4% to 3.7%); the mean difference was noninferior, with a mean of 0.5% (90% CI, -2.6% to 3.5%; P < .001). The effectiveness was similar at 12 months between the 2 catheter groups (mean risk difference, -1.8%; 90% CI, -7.3% to 3.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the CF-I6 catheter met the prespecified noninferiority safety criterion for persistent AF ablation compared with the CF-I56 catheter, and effectiveness was similar. This study demonstrates the ability of electronic health care system data to enable safety and effectiveness evaluations of medical devices.


Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Ablação por Cateter , Idoso , Fibrilação Atrial/cirurgia , Ablação por Cateter/métodos , Catéteres , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
14.
Med Devices (Auckl) ; 14: 411-421, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34880686

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration's Unique Device Identification System Rule of 2013 mandated manufacturers to assign unique device identifiers (UDIs) to their medical devices. Most high-risk (Class III), moderate-risk (Class II) and implantable devices now have UDIs. To achieve the necessary next step for a comprehensive UDI-enabled system for patient safety, UDIs must be electronically documented during patient care, a process not routinely done. The purpose of this research was to study the implementation experiences of diverse health systems in order to develop a roadmap for UDI implementation at the point of care. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with personnel at health systems that had implemented UDI for implantable devices in their cardiac catheterization labs or operating rooms. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the framework methodology of Ritchie and Spencer. Data interpretation involved development of a conceptual model and detailed recommendations for UDI implementation. An expert panel evaluated and provided input on the roadmap. RESULTS: Twenty-four interviews at ten health systems were conducted by phone. Participants described implementation steps, factors and barriers impacting implementation. Findings populated a UDI implementation roadmap, that includes Foundational Themes, Key Components, Key Steps, UDI Use, and Outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The UDI implementation roadmap provides a framework for health systems to address the necessary steps and multilevel factors that underpin UDI implementation at the point of care. It is intended to guide and advance routine electronic documentation of UDIs for devices used during clinical care, the critical next step for a comprehensive UDI-enabled system to enhance medical device safety and effectiveness for patients.

15.
J Am Med Inform Assoc ; 28(10): 2241-2250, 2021 09 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34313748

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to conduct an informatics analysis on the National Evaluation System for Health Technology Coordinating Center test case of cardiac ablation catheters and to demonstrate the role of informatics approaches in the feasibility assessment of capturing real-world data using unique device identifiers (UDIs) that are fit for purpose for label extensions for 2 cardiac ablation catheters from the electronic health records and other health information technology systems in a multicenter evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We focused on data capture and transformation and data quality maturity model specified in the National Evaluation System for Health Technology Coordinating Center data quality framework. The informatics analysis included 4 elements: the use of UDIs for identifying device exposure data, the use of standardized codes for defining computable phenotypes, the use of natural language processing for capturing unstructured data elements from clinical data systems, and the use of common data models for standardizing data collection and analyses. RESULTS: We found that, with the UDI implementation at 3 health systems, the target device exposure data could be effectively identified, particularly for brand-specific devices. Computable phenotypes for study outcomes could be defined using codes; however, ablation registries, natural language processing tools, and chart reviews were required for validating data quality of the phenotypes. The common data model implementation status varied across sites. The maturity level of the key informatics technologies was highly aligned with the data quality maturity model. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the informatics approaches can be feasibly used to capture safety and effectiveness outcomes in real-world data for use in medical device studies supporting label extensions.


Assuntos
Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Sistemas de Informação em Saúde , Estudos de Viabilidade , Informática , Processamento de Linguagem Natural
16.
BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol ; 3(1): e000089, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35047806

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of using real-world data to assess the safety and effectiveness of two cardiac ablation catheters for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation and ischaemic ventricular tachycardia. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Three health systems in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving ablation with the two ablation catheters of interest at any of the three health systems. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility of identifying the medical devices and participant populations of interest as well as the duration of follow-up and positive predictive values (PPVs) for serious safety (ischaemic stroke, acute heart failure and cardiac tamponade) and effectiveness (arrhythmia-related hospitalisation) clinical outcomes of interest compared with manual chart validation by clinicians. RESULTS: Overall, the catheter of interest for treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation was used for 4280 ablations and the catheter of interest for ischaemic ventricular tachycardia was used 1516 times across the data available within the three health systems. The duration of patient follow-up in the three health systems ranged from 91% to 97% at ≥7 days, 89% to 96% at ≥30 days, 77% to 90% at ≥6 months and 66% to 84% at ≥1 year. PPVs were 63.4% for ischaemic stroke, 96.4% for acute heart failure, 100% at one health system for cardiac tamponade and 55.7% for arrhythmia-related hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to use real-world health system data to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of cardiac ablation catheters, though evaluations must consider the implications of variation in follow-up and endpoint ascertainment among health systems.

20.
Circulation ; 127(9): 1052-89, 2013 Mar 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23357718
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa